The Black Caps' struggles against Australia reminded me of my dear old grandma who, bless her, once removed her dentures to give them a clean, turned to leave the bathroom only to find she'd put the teeth in the basin and the plug in her mouth.
As this column has pointed out before , some of the decisions being made in the Black Caps' camp are a bit, well, what that same grandmother used to call "a bugger's muddle".
They decided against playing Lockie Ferguson in the tests against England. That was vindicated by winning the series but it looked a bit suss when Ferguson – having had sod-all important cricket – immediately showed signs of nerves in his test debut against mighty Australia (rarely a good idea) and promptly blew a fetlock.
This column also queried playing left-arm spinner Mitch Santner – though his selection was assured after a gutsy century against England and a few fourth innings wickets to hasten the victory.
• Cricket: Australia question New Zealand's 'negative' bowling ahead of Boxing Day test
• Cricket: Steve Smith's warning about Black Caps test against Australia
• Cricket: Black Caps warm-up clash cancelled due to extreme heat
• Cricket: What you may have missed from day two of the first test between the Black Caps and Australia
But Australia in Australia are a different ball game. Santner's batting didn't come off this time and he took 0-146 in the first test. Black Caps' coach Gary Stead commented: "If we compare teams, Nathan Lyon has taken over 300 test wickets and we don't have anyone in New Zealand that's anywhere near that.
Santner has never taken more than three wickets in an innings in 21 tests and Stead said: "Mitch has done a wonderful role for us in winning a number of test matches, certainly in our conditions…we've also got some cover in the squad as well with Todd Astle."
How's that again? Lyon has indeed taken over 300 test wickets, six of them against New Zealand in the first test. But we have to take 20 wickets to win a test match and New Zealand does have this bloke called Will Somerville in the Auckland cricket team – a bowler of bouncy off spin not dissimilar to Lyon's.
Somerville, now 35 but still in his infancy as a test bowler, began his cricket career in Otago before moving to Australia; he did so well he was a test prospect until the Australian selectors instead plumped for, you guessed it, Nathan Lyon…
So if Somerville hasn't taken 300 test wickets, it's possibly because he is rarely selected. He looked good when making his test debut against Pakistan in Abu Dhabi last year, returning 4-75 off 36 overs. He's played only three tests (two against Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka) and has taken 14 wickets at an average of 25.14.
Not bad at all; much better than Santner's away record – 21 test wickets from 19 innings at an average of 50.14. Somerville is an attacking bowler with bounce, always useful in Australia (as Lyon keeps demonstrating) and a useful lower order bat.
So, Mr Stead...no, we don't have a Nathan Lyon-type spinner because you are not selecting him. Ajaz Patel, the left-armer who also did most everything asked of him in his call-ups is another who might do a job – but Somerville's bounce and local knowledge appeal as more effective in Australia.
It won't happen. Passed over again, Somerville has been buried in Plunket Shield cricket this year which, with its hiatus over Christmas/New Year and rain-interrupted matches, means he's had little first-class cricket though he and Patel have been playing limited overs stuff.
Astle might bowl well (if selected) but he'd be another basically making a test debut against Australia in Australia. He has played four tests, has only four wickets at an average of 54, with his best bowling 3-39 off 16 overs against England last year (Jonny Bairstow and two tail-enders).
Then there's the rather appalling continuity of Jeet Raval's consistent selection. Loyalty is one thing, feeding him to the lions is quite another.
Stead, queried about Raval's selection for Australia, said: "Jeet didn't have a strong series [against England] but we've got confidence in him as an opening bat, he's got a very good record with Tom [Latham] and they've forged a really strong opening partnership for us.
"He eats into a good number of balls – 75 balls on average – and if he does that every time he goes out to bat, then that's good, and he's done it over a good period of time so far. I'm confident he can get us away to the start that we want."
Nearly everyone – except the Black Caps leadership, it seems – could see the only thing Raval was likely to be eating into was his own confidence.
You can have some sympathy for the Raval selection, as Will Young would have taken over if he'd been fit – but, by the same chalk, the Black Caps have now thrust themselves into a position where their opening partnership looks like a weeping sore the Aussies are only too eager to rip the plaster from. These strange decisions by the Black Caps are getting hard to swallow.
Tom Blundell, if selected to open, can scarcely do any worse but, again, we are chucking a relatively untried bloke into a key match against Australia in Australia. It's embarrassing, even a bit Mickey Mouse.
It's taken decades to be asked to play in a Boxing Day test. If New Zealand doesn't do well in this one, it may be decades before we are asked again.